CHANDIGARH, India: Mr. Parkash Singh Badal, former Chief Minister of Punjab, and twenty-two other dissident Akalis MLAs challenged in the Punjab and Haryana high court the order passed by the Punjab Vidhan Sabha Speaker, Mr. Surjit Singh Minhas on the letter of Captain Amarinder Singh seeking recognition as the new Jeader of the new legislative wing of Shrimoni Akali Dal. The petitioner also challenged the constitutional amendment of 1985 that provides for the disqualification of the legislator who defects from the original legislative party. A division bench comprising Mr. Justice D.S.S Tiwattia and Mr. Justice B.B. Sehgal admitted the petition to be heard along with the petition of Mr. Arjan Singh Litt, Akali MLA, now pending with the full bench of Punjab and Haryana High court for hearing. The full bench also stayed another action against the petitioner by the Speaker although in the meanwhile Mr. Speaker is stayed to take the decision in the matter. Meanwhile, the petition for Mr. Litt came for hearing before a full bench comprising Chief Justice and four other Judges. The bench adjourned the case for Aug, 4th on the request of Mr. H.S. Amar Council for Union Government of India in view of the engagement of Attorney General of India who was to appear in the case on behalf of government of India. Mr. Badal and others stated that they were shocked to learn that Mr. Speaker had passed an order on July 4th on a letter written to him by Capt. Amarinder Singh saying that he had been elected leader by the 27MLAs.

The allegations of mollified were fully substantial, Referring to the remark of the Speaker that there are two leaders in a party it ‘was contended in the petition after the split vote, the faction of the party was independent of the original party. Both parties were entitled to elect new leaders. It was further stated that the stand of the ‘Speaker was untenable in view of the fact that the group had already been treated in Vidhan Sabha as a separate party. Allotment of the separate seats in Vidhan Sabha and inviting the leaver of the group to address the house during obituary references and also allowing the leader of the group to congratulate him in his election were cited to reinforce the plea that Speaker could not shut his eye to the fact that the group was recognized as a separate political party Pome house reel.

Article extracted from this publication >> July 18, 1986